Rolling Cannabis Politics Thread

haha stand up and SAY ...

fuck that, there's no such thing as "purely recreational aspect"

i know!
this is what they will say though "hey we have this pill now, there is no need for you guys to use this plant anymore, unless you just want to get HIGH"

No, we'll be all stoned, stand up all outraged, and then sit back down to try to remember why.

xpost

Aerosol, that's what they've been saying since the 80's.

seeing as "GETTING HIGH" hurts no one and is generally part of the deal with many existing mood disorder / anxiety medications i don't see they have a leg to stand on

also thank god for fiscal crisis and chaos in mexico, seems like we are *maybe* waking up from the "drug war" nightmare?

dude! look at what goes on here. you're over in CA going to your weed store and shit while people are getting busted for a couple of grams in THE BIG CITY
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/council-members-call-for-change-to-marijuana-possession-law/

my co op gave free t shirts away a little while ago and I saw some woman in my building walking around with one on and I was like hey I go there too, and she was like, what, and I was like your shirt, I go to that co op and she was like oh a friend of mine just gave this to me no wonder people have been smiling and talking to me more today

another reason not to hate california

http://batzbatz.com/uploads/posts/2010-02/1266562133_1997-take-california.jpg

i moved from california in 2002 before there were any dispensaries really :(

I think maybe it's a little too cynical to assume that this is just about making a pill that they can patent. Sequencing the genomes of various medicinal plants can help lead to all sorts of further scientific understanding and medical breakthroughs.

I think maybe it's a little too cynical to assume that this is just about making a pill that they can patent.

It's just cynical enough. Pharmaceutical companies aren't non-profits!

actually ... i don't see the scientific application at all, unless they plan to breed cannabis or identify its relatives

my understanding was that the application of genome sequencing was studying the genome without worrying about the details of the traits

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/nyregion/parents-minor-marijuana-arrests-lead-to-child-neglect-cases.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion

Disgusting.

http://gothamist.com/2011/09/24/ray_kelly_to_nypd_marijuana_is_decr.php

I'm pretty convinced that Bloomberg is the number one impediment to more liberal marijuana policy in NYC. Too bad he's gonna be mayor for life.

Fed about to come down hard in cali ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-kampia/obama-from-first-to-worst_b_1001781.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/11/war-on-weed-obama-marijuana_n_1005483.html

http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2011/10/10/20970/doj-vs-pot

discussion from yesterday w/ one of the u.s. attorneys involved w/ the california shutdowns. i was thinking the reporting on these particular prosecutions has been (slightly) hysterical, the dude is all over the place with some of his answers but that's still my impression.

wanted to post this on one of the other active political threads but googleproofed here so:
at this point i'm pretty much ready to vote for the first candidate that promises to legalize marijuana no matter what party

It would appear that Obama is innoculating himself from campaign accusations of being soft on druggies and of probably being a secret druggie himself, which would certainly help explain his embrace of communism, Islam, and America-hating to a lot of folks.

Mordy, you'll be interested in voting for whatever candidate the libertarians drag in, I guess.

Who I mostly voted for in 2010: http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/08/the-anti-prohibition-party/183998/

Not that particular candidate tho IIRC

I can't parse this recent activity at all. Medicinal pot is a no-brainer and pot legalization in general starting to look the same way. I mean, if you're worried about pre-election stance-taking (lol pussy), just don't do anything. Idiot.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/gallup-poll-is-first-to-find-plurality-support-for-marijuana-legalization/

presumably there's just so much money coming from the pharmaceutical industry and such a limited perceived downside from cracking down on drugs (alienate stoners + ex-felons) that a politician feels compelled to do crackdowns. i really can't imagine that these guys (and i mean guys like obama or bloomberg who have admitted history of drug use) are sincere in their prosecutions. i guess they might possibly believe that they are fulfilling the law -- even if they don't like it -- but they don't seem quite like inspector javert types to me.

and ftr I totally get these guys not exactly getting behind it w/ full-throated support, but what's the downside of a significant ratcheting down in prosecutions at this point? most likely you'll only be burnishing yr legacy IMO

presumably there's just so much money coming from the pharmaceutical industry
^^(on iPhone and missed this post)

But yeah all too true and just ...pathetic.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/justice-department-targets-banks-medical-marijuana-crackdown/story?id=14811540

Kevin Sabet, former Senior Policy Advisor to President Obama's Drug Czar, Gil Kerlikowske, and currently a consultant to drug prevention and policy organizations, said financial institutions that deal with medical marijuana organizations should be on alert.

"Smoked marijuana remains illegal in all states, and federal law -- while recognizing certain components of marijuana as having medicinal value -- does not allow the whole marijuana plant to be smoked for any purpose, including purported medical purposes," he said.

Sabet also warned that all states with legalized medical marijuana should pay attention to the enforcement actions in California.

"Remember, all actions have to be approved by Attorney General Holder, so it's hard to imagine that California would be the only place the Department of Justice is focusing on," Sabet said.

This is just like wtf? I cant even

"purported medical purposes"

Come the fuck on!

does not allow the whole marijuana plant to be smoked for any purpose

Illegal to smoke the roots, apparently.

But legal to eat THC worms?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g0npNxMvbDdiSKza1x1iTZjxyc6g?docId=857ef88e725c4bf69711ee247eba2ead

'twas the burning bush that gave the Israelites the word to escape into Canaan iirc

http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2011/nov/16/new_study_smart_people_more_like

Researchers discovered men with high childhood IQs were up to two times more likely to use illegal drugs than their lower-scoring counterparts. Girls with high IQs were up to three times more likely to use drugs as adults. [CNN]

So much of what we’ve been told about drugs and drug users turns out to be the opposite of the truth, it’s amazing that the anti-drug fanatics are able to find any audience at all anymore. News like this comes as a surprise only if you understand remarkably little about what drugs actually are and why people use them.

It ought to be intuitive that the curiosity which comes along with above-average intelligence would also be correlated with a heightened interest in experiencing altered states of consciousness. No doubt, a little extra brain-power also serves to inoculate against believing a lot of the BS we’re fed about how certain substances will turn your brain into a turnip.

It ought to be intuitive that the curiosity crushing despair which comes along with above-average intelligence would also be correlated with a heightened interest in experiencing altered states of consciousness getting stoned out of your gourd.

http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/health-and-fitness/28885-cedars-sinai-denying-transplant-to-medical-marijuana-patient-with-inoperable-liver-cancer.html

this is really fucked up.

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/tony-dsouza-marijuana-growers

The New Dealers
Family, kids, minivan—and drug dealing. How the recession has driven average Americans into the game.
—By Tony D'Souza | November/December 2011 Issue

"average Americans"

I actually like the language of normativity for this kind of thing...

http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451c45669e20168e508f74d970c-pi

Source? Just cos I'm a stoner doesn't mean I can't recognise a dishonest diagram when I see one.

read that article in the newsstand edition, people risking federal charges to get weed shipped to them so they can deal enough to pay the mortgage...I absolutely could not stand the heat, that's insane

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1665502/infographic-of-the-day-america-loves-weed-more-each-year

cheers max

people risking federal charges to get weed shipped to them

cool plan

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/11/marijuana-smoking-does-not-harm-lungs-study-finds/

In something of a twist, the researchers found that compared to nonsmokers, marijuana users performed slightly better on the lung function test, though the improvement was minuscule. “Even with this tiny increase in airflow, I have to admit that I really doubt that there’s any real increase in lung health,” said Dr. Stefan Kertesz, an associate professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham school of medicine and an author of the study. The finding may merely reflect marijuana smokers’ years of “training” in taking deep inhalations and holding the smoke, the researchers said.